“…Decency, security, and
liberty alike demand that government officials shall be subjected to the
same rules of conduct that are commands to the citizen. In a government of
laws, existence of the government will be imperiled if it fails to observe
the law scrupulously. Our government is the potent, the omnipresent
teacher. For good or for ill, it teaches the whole people by its example.
Crime is contagious. If the government becomes a law breaker, it breeds
contempt for laws; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it
invites anarchy…”

Mr. Justice Brandies, U.S. Supreme Court – dissent passage

Olmstead V. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928)

The
Constitution of the United States of America, Article VI, par. 2,
stipulates that the supreme Law of the Land consists of three elements:
(1) This Constitution, and (2) the Laws of the United States which shall
be made in Pursuance thereof (the Constitution), and (3) all Treaties made
(past tense), and which shall be (future tense), under the Authority of
the United States (government), shall be the supreme Law of the Land;
and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution
or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

Note
the above underlined qualifying phrase (“under the authority of
the United States”)! The authority of the United States (government) is
intentionally limited. It possesses no inherent or written authority to
change the fundamental character and/or structure of itself. Changes must
be lawfully made through the article 5 amendment process to wit:

U.S.
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS:

..a
treaty may not enlarge or amend the Constitution of the UnitedStates. In the case of New Orleans v. U.S. (10
Pet. 662, 1836), the Court saidthat Congress cannot by
legislation enlarge the Federal jurisdiction nor can it be enlarged
under the treaty-making power.

Again
in Doe v. Braden(16
How. 635, 1853), the Court indicated it thought that the Constitution
was superior to a treaty when it stated:The
treaty is therefore a law made by the proper authority, and the courts
of justice have no right to annul or disregard any of its provisions,
unless they violate the Constitution of the United States. ***

Later,
in The Cherokee Tobacco Case
(11 Wall.616, 620-621, 1870), the Supreme Court stated:It need hardly be
said that a treaty cannot change the Constitution or be held valid if
it be in violation of that instrument. This results from the nature
and fundamental principles of our Government.

The
Court, in the case of Geoffroy v. Riggs
(133 U.S. 258, 1890) that:It would not be contended that it (the treaty power) extends so
far as to authorize what the Constitution forbids, or a change in the
character of the Government or in that of one of the States, or a
cession of any portion of the territory of the latter, without its
consent.

U.S. Supreme Court, Reid v. Covert. 354
U.S. 1, 1957:

[No]
agreement with a foreign nation can confer power on the Congress, or on
any other branch of Government, which is free from the restraints of the
Constitution.

[There]
is nothing in [the supremacy clause] which intimates that treaties and
laws enacted pursuant to them do not have to comply with the provisions of
the Constitution. Nor is there anything in the debates which accompanied
the drafting and ratification of the Constitution which even suggests such
a result.

It
would be manifestly contrary to the objectives of those who created the
Constitution, as well as those who were responsible for the Bill of Rights
– let alone alien to our entire constitutional history and tradition –
to construe Article VI as permitting the United States to exercise power
under an international agreement without observing constitutional
prohibitions. In effect, such construction would permit amendment of that
document in a manner not sanctioned by Article V. The prohibitions of the
Constitution were designed to apply to all branches of the National
Government and they cannot be nullified by the Executive or by the
Executive and the Senate combined….”Constitutional Law, Stone, Seidman, Sunstein Tushnet
– p. 216.

Did
the senate and president change the fundamental character and/or structure
of government via the U.N. charter treaty? Answer: yes! Check out the
following changes:

1.
The senate and president obligated the United States, as a member of The
United Nations, “To accept and carry out the decisions of the (U.N.)
Security Council in accordance with the present charter.”(U.N.
Charter, Article 25) (And 89 out of 91 Senators voted for it!)

2.
Congress no longer declares war. Who does! Answer: Nobody. The U.N.
peacefully ended all wars in 1945! The last and only reference to war
appears in the first paragraph of the U.N. charter’s preamble.

3.
What, then, does congress do? It only appropriates the money because
"the (U.N.) security council shall determine the existence of
any threat to the peace, breach of peace, or act of aggression and shall
make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in
accordance with articles 41 and 42 to maintain or restore international
peace and security." (See U.N. Charter, Article39) (Examples:
Korea, Katanga, Rhodesia, Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, etc.)

4.
The
(U.N.) Korean and Vietnamese “Peace Operations” were both fought
according to peaceful U.N. rules of engagement – don’t shoot – let
the enemy shoot first. Both wars were no-win wars based on defensive
“containment” and attrition because offensive actions violate U.N.
charter principles of “pacific settlement” and of “human rights.”
American troops are still stationed there and all over the world while
illegal aliens including terrorist enemies of America are invading us. The
war goes on while Americans are being conditioned to accept perpetual U.N.
wars for perpetual U.N. “peace.”

5.
Congress
no longer regulates commerce with foreign nations. Congress conveniently
“fast tracked” that power and constitutionally delegated
responsibility over to a 'faceless' international bureaucracy that now
regulates U.S. commerce instead.

6.
Congress
annually plunders billions from U.S. taxpayers to “pay our fair share”
as a member in “good standing" and to: “promote higher standards
of living, full employment, and conditions of economic and social progress
and development”-
world-wide! (Article 55)

7.
Congress
un-constitutionally passed the U.S. Participation Act in 1945 by
transferring powers to the president; powers greatly exceeding those
granted him by the Constitution.

U.S.
Participation Act, “Sec. 5. (a)
Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law whenever the United
States is called upon by the Security Council to apply measures which said
Council has decided, pursuant to article 41 of said Charter, are to be
employed to give effect to its decisions under said Charter, the
President may, to the extent necessary to apply such measures, through
any agency which he may designate, and under such orders, rules, and
regulations as may be prescribed by him, investigate, regulate, or
prohibit, in whole or in part, economic relations on rail, sea, air,
postal, telegraphic, radio, and other means of communication between any
foreign country or any national thereof or any person therein and the
United States or any person subject to the jurisdiction thereof, or
involving any property subject to the jurisdiction of the United
States.” (Page 086 Senate Document #87, 1954, “Review of the United
Nations Charter.”)

The
above random examples illustrate major constitutionally unauthorized
changes in the fundamental character and structure of the U.S. government.
The Constitution was never lawfully amended to permit the president and
congress to expand their own powers through laws or treaties such as the
United Nations charter and other fraudulent U.N. related treaties and
“covenants”.

Therefore:
The U.N. charter “treaty” was not ratified (made) under the authority
of the United States (government) because such authority did not and still
does not constitutionally exist. The U.N. charter was the intended gateway
to one-world government and destruction of the magnificent American
constitutional system by cleverly twisting the limited treaty-making power
of the president, the U.S. Senate and the limited legislative powers of
congress. It was designed by Soviet agents including Alger Hiss and fully
supported by the Communist Party U.S.A. (Political Affairs, April 1945)

The
U.N. is an international Marxist war-machine sold as the “world’s last
and only hope for peace” to war-weary Americans in 1945. Immediately
thereafter, and now, U.N. “peace” continues all over the world at the
high cost of multi-trillions of dollars. Since 1945, more than 100,000
American sons, brothers, sisters and fathers have been “peacefully”
slaughtered, several hundred thousand more maimed for life and unknown
numbers abandoned as POW’s and MIA’s. Grieving families are told to be
proud that their loved ones “died in the service of the United
Nations.” Question: Who benefits?

Americans
must demand that congress returns to its constitutionally limited role and
operates within the law that each member has sworn to protect and defend.

The
U.N. charter treaty was fraudulently imposed upon this nation for ulterior
reasons. The honorable Ron Paul’s American Sovereignty Restoration
Act (HR-1146)will sever
all connections with the United Nations – including its presence on
American soil! The duty of congress and the president is defending the
United States, its Constitution, its citizens and their lives, liberty and
property – not bankrupting the nation by policing and supporting the
entire globe!

Robert Pletka founded the National United Nations
Research Association in 1970 to expose the fraudulently ratified U.N.
Charter, its associated treaties, and their use to subversively expand the
Constitutionally limited powers of government. He enlisted and served in
the U.S. Army Air Corps (1942-1946). Still taking his oath seriously, he
teaches classes and writes on the genius of the Founders’ original
intent and works.